[MD] Art of Value

[Case]

[Ham]
Your mention of phenomenalism was with reference to physicists.

[Case]
I brought this up in response to your post and its confused account of the
origins of the term. I have no interest in exploring the positions of
various physicist in this regard. 

[Ham]
I don't wear a "stripe" and dislike the phenomenalist connotation.  I'm an 
Essentialist who believes in a primary absolute source which negates all 
nothingness to cause the appearance of differentiated existence.  If  this 
smacks of idealism or phenomenalism to you, so be it.

[Case]
Really my only question was whether or not you deny the existence of an
external world however you chose to characterize it.

[Case]:
> There is the world of private experience that is not separated from us.

[Ham]
All experience is proprietary awareness of something other than ourselves. 
I call this object of awareness the "essent" to distinguish it from absolute

Essence.  We sense it pre-intellectually as Value and intellectualize it 
differentially as the discreet phenomena of experience.

[Case]
This is not a metaphysical question. All experience is subjective to the
experiencer. Experience comes to use through the senses we do not have
direct access to objects in the world. We have sense impressions these are
recorded into memory and organized into perceptions. But all we have access
to directly is nervous impulses.

[Ham]
"Us" -- you and I -- are nothing without the objectivized reality that we 
experience.  Otherwise, I agree with your statement.

[Case]
Objectivity comes through intersubjective sharing of subjective experience.

[Ham]
Value is directly sensible.  Perception is the differentiation of value into

relational existents (things and events).

[Case]
If you regard Values are biologically determined emotional responds perhaps
your first sentence here makes sense but this is pretty shakey. Perception
is a process of classifying direct sensation into memory.

[Ham]
Every experienced phemomenon is separated from otherness by our own 
nothingness -- even "similar" things.  This is a metaphysical principle, not

mathematics.  What you call an "error" is the illusion of finite 
multiplicity.

[Case]
Experience is the process of integrating otherness. As I have mentioned may
times constructing a metaphysics that ignores the principles of mathematics
and reason is just fantasy. If there are no rules I can construct a
metaphysics that centers on the activities of invisible unicorns.

[Ham]
Memory recalls experience as divided things and events; that's how the brain

records them.  Sliding back and forth in time is a function of memory, not 
imagination.  Imagination is the creative conjuring up of events in a way 
that we have not experienced them.

[Case]
Sliding back and forth is time is much more than a function of memory. We
can not after all remember the future. We can access memory to construct
models of the future or to indulge in fantasy. See above.